Taxpayers in Maine are currently shouldering the costs for a new housing project in Brunswick designed to provide shelter for newly arrived border crossers and illegal aliens. This initiative, revealed earlier this week, involves the construction of 60 new apartment units, 24 of which are already completed. These apartments are specifically earmarked for asylum seekers, who often face delays in obtaining work permits due to processing times.

The funding for this project, including the provision of rent for up to two years for these individuals, comes from the Maine State Housing Authority. This move has been financed through the state budget, with nearly $3.5 million allocated for covering these rental costs. After the two-year period, these housing units are planned to transition to a combination of market-rate and affordable housing, although this could change depending on the state’s assessment of the program’s necessity.

Additionally, the state is investing $100,000 in legal support to assist these migrants with their asylum applications and work authorization. The goal is to expedite their ability to join the workforce, thereby reducing the burden on public assistance programs and contributing to the local economy.

However, this initiative comes at a time when Maine is grappling with significant housing challenges for its existing residents. Approximately 4,200 people across the state are homeless, with over 1,000 experiencing long-term homelessness. The housing crisis is further intensified by soaring housing prices, with the median price of a single-family home now exceeding $350,000.

The growing demand for housing in Maine, partly fueled by mass immigration, is also a contributing factor to the rising costs. From 2000 to 2021, Maine’s foreign-born population increased by nearly 53%, adding over 20,000 immigrants to the state’s population of less than 1.4 million.

It’s clear that Democrats do not care about Americans, especially white Americans. Their push to make the country non-white is clearly evident at this point.

The Department of Energy (DOE) under President Joe Biden made a wrong turn by overturning Trump-era regulations aimed at enhancing the efficiency of dishwashers and laundry machines, as ruled by a federal appeals court. A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declared that the DOE’s actions were “arbitrary and capricious,” questioning the department’s legal authority to regulate water use in these appliances.

Judge Andrew Oldham wrote in the order that the 2020 Rules, which aimed to reduce wash times, potentially enhanced both energy and water efficiency more than the Repeal Rule. The DOE, however, chose to dismiss these advancements.

Back in 2018, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) urged the DOE to review energy regulations that affected dishwasher performance. The CEI sought a new class of dishwashers with cycle times under an hour, as per the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975. The DOE agreed, creating a class for dishwashers and standard residential dishwashers with a normal cycle duration of one hour or less.

The 2020 decision was based on public feedback during the proposal stage, with many supporting the change as existing regulations led to multiple runs of dishwashers for clean dishes, contrary to energy efficiency goals. The DOE then expanded this approach to laundry machines, creating new classes of washers and dryers with shorter cycle times.

However, upon taking office, Biden directed the DOE to reconsider these rules. In 2022, the DOE revoked both dishwasher and laundry machine rules, leading to a lawsuit by a group of states led by Louisiana.

The Fifth Circuit found that the rollback of Trump-era rules resulted in greater energy and water usage, as supposedly energy-efficient appliances failed to perform effectively. This led to increased usage of these appliances or alternative methods to clean dishes and clothes.

Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill and Will Hild, executive director for Consumers’ Research, both praised the ruling. Murrill highlighted the practicality of efficient appliances for families, while Hild criticized the Biden administration’s climate-change agenda for restricting consumer choices. Marc Morano from Climate Depot also lauded the court’s decision, noting the negative impact of energy and water restrictions on appliance performance and American households.

The Biden administration continues to target household appliances in its environmental efforts, but this ruling marks a significant pushback against policies perceived as overreaching and detrimental to everyday Americans. The case, Louisiana v. Department of Energy, underscores the ongoing debate over environmental regulations and their impact on consumer goods and lifestyles.

A recent Rasmussen survey reveals that nearly half of Americans feel their economic situation has worsened compared to last year. The survey, involving 1,102 Americans post-Christmas, indicates a growing discontent with the economic climate under the Biden administration.

According to the survey, 45 percent of participants believe they are financially worse off than they were a year ago. In contrast, only 23 percent feel they are better off, creating a significant 22-point gap. About 29 percent of respondents feel their financial status has remained unchanged.

This poll reflects the challenges faced by the Biden administration in promoting their economic policies, often referred to as “Bidenomics.” Rising inflation, or “Bidenflation” as critics call it, is a key factor contributing to the public’s negative perception. Over the 12 months leading up to November, consumer prices increased by 3.1 percent, a substantial rise following a 7.1 percent increase in the preceding 12 months. Since Biden’s inauguration, consumer prices have surged by 16.8 percent.

Despite average hourly wages growing faster than inflation in the year leading up to November, the overall increase in wages since Biden took office stands at 14.3 percent. This figure falls short of the inflation rate, leaving workers effectively behind economically.

Political affiliation plays a significant role in these perceptions. Thirty-nine percent of Democrats report feeling better off, compared to just 18 percent of Republicans and 13 percent of independents. This disparity underscores the current political polarization in the U.S., especially among the American left.

There’s also a noticeable racial divide in economic perceptions. While 32 percent of black Americans say they’re worse off than last year, the number jumps to 45 percent among whites and 55 percent among other minorities. This disparity highlights the varying economic impacts on different racial groups in the country.

The survey’s findings point to a growing economic dissatisfaction among Americans, influenced by factors like inflation and wage growth. These issues, coupled with political and racial divisions, paint a complex picture of the nation’s economic health under the current administration.

As House Republicans gear up for impeachment proceedings against Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, a group of over 60 House Republicans, led by Speaker Mike Johnson, embarked on a tour of the southern border, specifically the Eagle Pass area in Texas.

During their visit, the Republicans received a comprehensive briefing from Border Patrol officials, shedding light on the dire situation at the border and its staggering financial implications. According to estimates provided by Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the cartels operating in the Del Rio, Texas sector alone are raking in an astounding $32 million per week. This eye-popping figure has raised concerns about the economic impact of the Biden administration’s immigration policies.

While many Americans are grappling with the effects of inflation and economic uncertainty, it appears that the cartels are thriving due to lax border enforcement measures. This revelation has sparked further debate about the Biden administration’s approach to border security and its potential consequences.

In response to the ongoing border crisis and Secretary Mayorkas’ leadership, House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark E. Green (R-TN) announced a forthcoming full committee hearing scheduled for January 10, 2024. The hearing aims to assess the broader impacts of Mayorkas’ tenure and his alleged failure to enforce congressional laws.

The House Committee on Homeland Security has been conducting a thorough investigation into the root causes and repercussions of the immigration crisis, with a particular focus on Mayorkas’ decision-making. The investigation has highlighted the role of Mayorkas in perpetuating the crisis by implementing policies that many Republicans argue are contrary to the laws of the United States.

The decision to move forward with impeachment proceedings against Secretary Mayorkas comes after a bipartisan House vote in November, signaling widespread concern about his performance. The upcoming hearing is expected to shed more light on the case for impeachment and the potential consequences it may have for the Biden administration.

As House Republicans continue their visit to the southern border and the impeachment proceedings gain momentum, the border crisis remains a pressing issue that has far-reaching economic and political implications. The hearing on January 10th will be a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over border security and Secretary Mayorkas’ leadership.

Author: Steven Sinclaire